Domarius on 14/5/2006 at 14:35

---

Goldmoon, I didn't share your experience. I let myself get absorbed into the plot and the cinematics and the scenery, (and of course my interaction with the AI and their interactions with each other). The particular cutscene with the shot of the [SPOILER]the fallen clock tower pointing to the keeper tower[/SPOILER] felt especially creepy at that moment for some reason. It was very ominous.
And when I reached the Cradle, hell yeah I was scared. I didn't know what to expect. And it certainly didn't dissapoint.

Personally I just accepted some of the failings (such as no swimming, no rope arrow, etc) and got over it and enjoyed the rest of the game.

Goldmoon Dawn on 14/5/2006 at 18:15

---

My experience with t3 is limited to an almost play through once. Don't pay any attention to me as my opinion is limited in that way. When I decide to go back to a powerful computer again, t3 will surely be in rotation. Thanks to New Horizon and John, as well as others, a "Dark Project fanatic" like me will fare better. Thank you.

Yes, I say fanatic. I didn't like t2 or 3. I loved all the sound effects and voices though. I am one of those dark evil rpg people. T1 had just enough darkness to what I am accustomed to. :ebil: I did think that t2 was a pretty fair forgery though.

So, regardless of how well t3 is, I will always be a fanatic, dedicated to the true masterpiece that is, The Dark Project.

:)

Cerebration on 16/5/2006 at 14:29

---

The devs must rue the day they ever thought of creating the Thieves' Highway, as this seems to be the one thing that everyone remembers even though it only made up half of one particular mission. Trouble is, it now means that any level set in a city has to come complete with a fully mapped roofline otherwise people will say it 'ruins the immersion'. Coupled with the idea that every building has to be fully accessible and crammed with interesting fixtures and fittings, this creates some pretty demanding requirements. There's a danger of getting into Deus Ex territory where every conceivable route has to be mapped out in full, even if the mission and story really don't need it.

[Rant begins]
We may be disappointed with TDS, but I think it's important to recognise that if TDS had been delivered with the same basic rules of the game as TDP or TMA it would have been just as much of a 'failure'. Better graphics and improved AI are givens, but what about innovation in gameplay? Remember that even when TMA was released there were comments that it was a little too similar in terms of gameplay to TDP, and that a major shakeup would be needed in the next installment. I agree that many decisions turned out to be wrong and the size limitations and loss of rope arrows was a real blow, but at least there was a drive to try out some new ideas.

Instead of talking vaguely about 'immersion' (a word which only seemed to appear on these boards in the wake of TDP), I think we should remember that unlimited level sizes and more realistic graphics won't actually make a game any different in the long run, so long as the core elements are the same.

The (probably impossible) challenge for TDS was coming up with new ideas that work not just in a stealth game (of which there are now many) but also within Thief's unique setting where the fiction introduces its own specific constraints. For example, Randy Smith did a GDC presentation in 2003 about Power-Ups, and it gives an insight into the difficulty of coming up with new gadgets which are widely applicable but are not already made redundant by existing equipment. (Incidentally it was here that flashbombs were identified as being too useful for attack and were refashioned into an escape tool).

So, short of turning Thief into an all-out gadget-fest, what about movement options? I know some people would have liked Garrett to have much more athletic ability so as to keep up with the likes of Sam Fisher, but I'm sure many would have been horrified by the sight of our hero flailing about like a ninja on speed. It just shows how different everyone's views on the direction of Thief were after TMA, and how difficult it has been in trying to realise them. [Rant ends]

ZylonBane on 16/5/2006 at 16:36

---

And yet, it didn't ruin the game. On the contrary, doing that was extremely fun. The TDS approach took away that fun, and replaced it with the blatantly illogical blindness-curing blackjack.

As I've said many times in the past-- Classic Thief was designed as a simulation, TDS was designed as "just a game".

tiger@sound.net on 16/5/2006 at 18:23

---

(Thank you, Cerebration, for those very in-depth comments.)
Since this is my very first stealth-based game, I am attacking things a bit differently with its "gameplay and mechanics", first.

First, I added my own special toggling movement and climbing-keys with the help of your senior member, jtbalogh, below.
(http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=83310&page=26) Thief 3 Tweaks - Requests and Discussion

And now, I'm trying to bring forth your rather hidden "Thief's Highway", here.
(http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=106335) T3 Climbing and that Thief's Highway idea
(Heck, I went almost completely through T3, just barely using those "special climbing gloves" after all of that wasted time on the City Streets with all of their "dead end" wall-climbs, folks. And finding that Thief's Highway was purely accidental and not even some sort of "gameplay fun" or a special path-option, by then.)

And, to me, a small gameplay-redesign idea might have been to have simply given the player 2000 gold pieces or more, made the gloves available at the first shop and then, told them about your Thief's Highway within the City Streets, right at the very beginning, T3 designers? (And then, you could have let a simple "pointing red-hand", on those special climbing and/or mantling-places, do the work for you, perhaps?) :cool: